Only
connect! That was the whole of her sermon. Only connect the prose
and the passion, and both will be exalted, and human love will be
seen at its highest.E.M. Forster,
Howards End

We are relentless
communicators. We have a passion for `reaching' people, for
`connecting'. We tell one another where we, they and all the others
are `at' or `coming from'. Even our refusal to speak is an act of
communication: `I won't speak to you', it says. And it is understood
as `This person won't speak to me'. We communicate in sentences even
on this pre-speech level.

On speech level
the sentence is openly with us, even when it is only a word of itself:
When someone says `Milk!' a shopkeeper will understand something like
`This rude slob is asking me to sell him some milk', having already
understood the slob's 'Milk!' to be an economical version of `I
should like some milk, please'.

There is no
getting away from it: We communicate in sentences. They are to
communication as oxygen is to breathing. The long and the short of it
is this: When we say something, or understand what someone else has
said, we make sentences whether we intend to or not. So did
Neanderthal Man. The difference between his and our way was achieved
in the interim that saw ever more refined structures assemble to make
life easy. One of those was the prose-structure we now know as that
sequence of words that raises a subject and says something about it:
the sentence. We use it to transmit our passion for communicating,
successfully or unsuccessfully, depending on how well we understand
its capabilities.

This prose
structure, our highly-refined contemporary sentence, manifests in two
ways: as an independent sentence and as a dependent sentence.

The
independent sentence

The sentence that raises a
subject and says something about it (or `predicates something of
it’) is an independent sentence. It makes a statement that makes sense
and only one sense. Such a statement has only three structural models,
or `basic-sentence’ types. They are the verb sentence, the copula
sentence and the copular-verb sentence.

The independent
sentence is the typical written sentence. It is the one we depend on
when we write an essay, an article for a periodical, a thesis – in
short, when we write in any genre that does not require us to
represent casual-speech structures.

Subject
and Predicate

The sentence raises a subject and says
something about it. To put it another, more formal, way: The
sentence predicates something of the subject. This is all that
Traditional Grammar means when it declares that the sentence
consists of a subject and a predicate.

The
indispensable basic sentence

No sequence of words is a
sentence if it fails to make one unambiguous sense. No sequence of
words makes one unambiguous sense unless it is a basic sentence or it
contains one. Stripped of its basic sentence, this sequence makes no
sense:

very
best a dog called Caesar contemporary street.

It
becomes sensible only when a basic sentence holds it together:

My
very best friend, a dog called Caesar, does not respect
contemporary street sculpture.

Writers must
become so familiar with the three models of the basic sentence that
one `jumps out' at them from every sentence they read. Such a level of
familiarity will ensure that the sentences they write will never fail
to meet the first and most important criterion of valid
sentence-construction: the unmistakable presence of a basic sentence.
It will ensure also that they are able to punctuate the longer
sentences they write.

Before
you read on …

In the course of
reading about what sentences do, you will come upon quite a bit of
`parts of speech’ vocabulary. If you are new to this, don’t let it
worry you. This Chapter means to make only the point that every part
of a sentence does something to contribute to the sense the whole
makes. Observe this, and leave concerns about the precise meaning of
`noun’, `adjective’, etc. until you read the second
Chapter. (You will find that these terms `stick’ to you anyway.
Don’t make heavy weather of it.)

Verb model of the basic sentence

In
the verb model of the basic sentence there always is a specific
relationship between the subject and object in a sentence. In
every instance of a verb basic sentence the subject and object
relate in one the following ways:

1. The subject acts upon the object.

In
this sentence:

Nationalism
alarms minorities,

the
subject 'nationalism’ perpetrates an act, denoted by the verb
`alarms’, upon the object `minorities’. Traditional Grammar says of
sentences in which the subject acts upon the object that they are active
voice sentences.

subject

predicate

verb

object

Nationalism

alarms

minorities.

The
man

opened

the
gate.

2.
The object acts upon the subject.

In this sentence:

A
will to live is developed by the endangered,

the
object `the endangered’ acts upon the subject `a will to live’. The
verb `is developed’ denotes this act. Traditional Grammar says of sentences
in which the object acts upon the subject that they are sentences cast
in the passive voice mode. As all verb sentences, this one has an
active voice too, as the grid shows:

subject

predicate

verb

object

A
will to live

is
developed

by
the endangered (noun phrase).

The
endangered

develop

a
will to live (noun phrase).

`Infinitive’ complications and the
complemented verb

There are infinitives that
consist of more than `to’ and one word: `To set’ is one infinitive,
`to set free’ quite another. Their meanings are different, just like
the meanings of `to give’ and `to give up’ are different. They are
the cause of structures such as `He set me free’, in which the object
`me’ comes between the parts of the infinitive. These structures are
otherwise ordinary active-voice verb sentences that typically also have
a passive voice: `I was set free by him’. This situation is less
obvious in the infinite that seems to have a `to make (someone) do’
structure. We meet this structure regularly in statements such as:

He
made me clean the house/wash dishes/laugh (active voice).

There
is no doubt that this, too, is a sentence in which the subject acts upon
the object (active voice), or the object acts upon the subject (passive
voice):

I
was made to clean the house/wash dishes/laugh by him
(passive voice).

So
this is certainly a verb sentence. The curious thing is that in the
passive voice sentence the verb changes to the phrase `was made to
clean’. This reveals that the real object in this sentence is `the
house’, not `me’. However, it is indisputable that the subject `he'
acts upon the object `me'. (More will be said later about how `clean the
house’ in the active-voice structure is the noun phrase that names the
content of the verb `made’.)

subject

predicate

verb

object

complement

He

made

me (direct)

clean the house.

I

was
made to clean

the
house (indirect) by him (direct).

3. The activity between subject and object devolves
upon a third party.

As subject and
object perpetrate an act upon one another, a third party is affected by
the action. So in `He read me the Riot Act’ the subject `he’
perpetrated an act upon the object `Riot Act’: he read it. 'The
riot act' is therefore the direct object of the subject’s
activity that is denoted by the verb `read’. This subject acts also
upon `me’. So `me’ is also an object. But it is not the direct
object that the subject acts upon: it is the indirect object of the
subject’s activity `read’:

subject

predicate

verb

object

He

read

me
(indirect) the Riot Act (direct).

The
minister

read

the
Riot Act (direct) to the marchers (indirect).

4.
The activity between subject and object is named by the predicate noun
complement.

In this sentence:

He
called them liars,

the
subject `he’ acts upon the object `them’. To this extent, this
sentence is of the type outlined in `1’. It differs from it markedly,
however, in that the noun `liars’ is embedded into the `1’ sort of
structure, `he called them’, to name the content of the activity
`called’. That noun is not an object at all. It is therefore in no way
possible to call it an `indirect object’. Other sentences of the same
structure are:

The
boy taughthis grandmother Mathematics
The
boy taught his grandmother to suck eggs.

The
subject `the boy’ perpetrated the act denoted by the verb `taught’
on the object ,`his grandmother’. The content of the subject’s act is
named by the noun `Mathematics’ in the first sentence, and by the
infinitive-noun phrase `to suck eggs’ in the second.

subject

predicate

verb

object

activity-naming
noun
complement

He

called

them

liars.

The
boy

taught

his
grandmother

Mathematics.

The
boy

taught

his
grandmother

to
suck eggs.

5.
The subject acts upon the object to procure its existential or
geographical state.

In this sentences:

The
film had me laughing,

the
subject `the film’ acted upon the object `me’ to put it into a
laughing state. The meaning here can be paraphrased as `he had me in a
laughing state’. `In a laughing state’ names the existential state
of the object `me’. The actual sentence, however, has truncated the
noun phrase to `laughing’. The truncation nevertheless functions as a
noun in this sentence, as the paraphrasing indicates that it must. It is
a noun embedded into the basic sentence `he had me’. In another
sentence:

He
sat me in the front row,

an
embedded noun phrase with the same function, `in the front row’, is
kept in entirety to name the whereabouts of the object `me’. It, too,
is embedded into the verb basic sentence.

subject

predicate

verb

object

noun
complement

The film

had

me

[in
a] laughing [state].

The usher

sat

me

in the
front row.

6.
The subject acts upon the object such that only the object is the
experiencer of the act.

In this sentence:

John
interests Mary,

the
subject `John’ certainly perpetrates an act upon the object `Mary’.
But only the object `Mary’ experiences the effect of that act. The
subject `John’ may not even be aware that he has perpetrated that act.
This situation exits because there are verbs that are inherently
'object-experiencer' verbs. These are: annoy, irritate, amaze, provoke,
impress, interest. Some of their synonyms might also prove to be
object-experiencer verbs in some constructions.

subject

predicate

verb

object

John

intrigues

Mary.

A
noise

annoys

an oyster.

The
`subject + verb’ sentence as the basic sentence.

Where the basic sentence is a `verb + subject’ sentence, nothing
is predicated of the subject other than that the subject does, has done
or will do something:

Mary
teaches.

Mary
has taught.

The
Prime Minister willresign.

All that can happen in the `verb
+ subject’ sentence is that certain indicators describe the
subject’s act. Those indicators are adverbs. They describe:

- when (time)
the subject perpetrated an act:

She
arrivedearly;

- how (manner)
the subject perpetrated an act:

The
girl answeredslowly;

The
girl camebegging for mercy;

- the
intensity (degree) of the subject’s act:

We
couldhardlysee.

subject

predicate

verb

adverb

Mary

teaches.

The
Prime Minister

resigned.

The
girl

came

begging
for mercy
(manner).

We

could hardly (degree) see.

They

ate

slowly
(manner).

It has been claimed, thanks to the `subject + predicate’
sentence, that describing sentence structure is a sham. The claimants
argued that Traditional Grammar holds that `Mother is cooking’ and
`Dinner is cooking’ are sentences of the same syntactic structure. If
Traditional Grammar’s system of analysis were constrained to do that,
it would indeed be a sham. But it is not so constrained. The sentence
`Mother is cooking’ (Mother
is doing the cooking) is a `verb + subject’ sentence. `Dinner is
cooking’ is a copula sentence in which the predicate adjective
`cooking’ describes the subject `dinner’ (`the cooking dinner’).

Copula model of the basic sentence

The copula model of the basic sentence makes a statement in which
the copula (a formation that derives from the
infinitive 'to be') assigns the subject either a description or a definition or a
location (geographical or existential) or an occupier. In behaving thus,
the copula basic sentence is completely different from the verb basic
sentence. It has to be different because there is no relationship of
subject and object in it. Indeed, the copula sentence does not have an
object. It has instead a complement.

1. The copula assigns a description to the subject.

In the sentences that follow, the copula has the complement
describe the subject. A description that occurs in this way is called a predicate
adjective if it is achieved by a single word, and predicate-adjective
phrase if it is achieved by a sequence of words. In the sentence:

John
wasill/annoying/pleased,

the copula assigns the
description `ill’ (or `annoying’ or `pleased’) to the subject
`John’. In the next sentence:

Walking
to school might have beenas bad as you say,

the copula `might have been’
assigns the description `as bad as you say’ to the subject `walking to
school’.

subject

predicate

copula

complement

John

was

pleased
(predicate adjective).

Walking
to school

might
have been

as
bad as you say (predicate adjective phrase).

2. The copula assigns a definition to the subject.

This activity of the copula has the complement define the
subject. In:

Practice
is what you need,

the copula `is’ defines the
subject `practice’ in terms of the noun phrase `what you need’. In
the next sentence:

To
know that you are well has always been all I
asked,

the copula phrase `has always
been’ has the complement `all I have ever asked’ define the subject `To know that you are
well’.

subject

predicate

copula

complement

To
know that you are well (noun phrase)

has
always been

all
I asked (noun phrase).

Practice

is

what you need (noun phrase).

3. The copula assigns a place in space to the subject.

In this role, the
copula has the complement name the location of the subject. In so doing,
it names the place that, geographically speaking, the subject occupies
(or did or will occupy). The complement in such sentences names a
geographic location (which is necessarily a place). It is therefore a
locative noun phrase when it names a place (`John was in London/at the
party’), and a locative pronoun when it refers to a place (`John was
here/there’).

subject

predicate

copula

complement

He

had
been

there
(locative pronoun).

He

used
to be

in
London (locative noun).

4. The copula assigns a place in existential space to
the subject.

In this role, the copula has the complement tell us where the
subject is on a spiritual, ethical, moral, professional, etc.
plane. In:

He is
beyond recall,

the subject `he’ is located by
the copula `is’ in some spiritual (or ethical or moral) space that is
named by the noun phrase `beyond recall’. In the sentence:

They
were in mourning,

the subject `they’ is located
by the copula `were’ in the spiritual space named by the noun phrase
`in mourning’. In the sentence:

She had
been on duty,

the subject `she’ is located
by the copula phrase `had been’ in her professional space, named by
the noun phrase `on duty’.

subject

predicate

copula

complement

They

were

in
mourning (noun phrase).

She

had
been

on duty (noun phrase).

He

is

beyond recall (noun phrase).

5. The copula effects the occupation of the vacant
subjects `it’ and `that’.

When the copula sentence does not name a subject but erects a
token one instead (`It', `That', `What') the erection is a
vacant one yet to be filled with the naming capacity (a noun or noun
phrase) of the complement. The copula directs that this filling, or
occupying, take place. Thus in the sentence:

It istrue that he is happy,

the copula `is’ directs the
noun phrase `that he is happy’to occupy the vacant subject
`It’. This occupation is evident in that the noun phrase can sensibly
take the place of the subject:

Itis true that he is happy.That
he is happyis true.

The subjects `It’ and `That’ are not always
vacant subjects.

The vacant subject should not be confused with `It' subjects that
are not vacant. In this sentence `It’ represents the subject raised in
an earlier sentence:

This
machineis in good order. Itwas fixed yesterday.

In this sentence `That’
represents the sense `the person you saw who was not me':

`I
am sure I saw you there.'
`No.
That was my sister.’

No
adverb in a copula sentence

The
important characteristic of the the copula sentence is that it cannot contain an adverb. This is no more than logical, for adverbs
modify verbs, and the copula sentence does not contain a verb, for the
simple reason that it is a copula sentence, not a verb sentence. Now, it
might seem that this copula sentence:

He
is really ill,

contains
the adverb `really'. But it does not, for `really' modifies the predicate
adjective `ill'. Modifying an adjective, a word cannot be said to be
functioning as an adverb. Rather, `really' is itself an adjective. It has
exactly the same function as `very', or any other degree/intensity-setting
qualifier of an adjective: He is very/dangerously/etc. ill. (For some
reason that is not at all easy to identify, Traditional Grammar tends to call
these qualifiers `adverbs of degree'. We suggest that `adjectives of degree' is
by far the more perspicacious term.)

Critics of the observation that there is no adverb in a copula sentence
have proposed that sentences such as:

It isreally John / It really
is John

refute that observation. These critics rely on the erroneous assumption
that `really' is by nature an adverb. Well, it is not, as we noted in
the sentence `He is really ill'. Just as in that sentence `really'
pertains to the predicate adjective `ill', so in the above sentences
`really' pertains to the noun `John'. And, pertaining to a noun, it is
necessarily an adjective. `Is' in these sentences effects the occupation
by the complement `really John' of the two vacant subjects `It'. (The
semantic template is obviously not `the is-ing John'; it is `the really
John'.)

Copular-verb model of the basic sentence

The copular verb looks like a verb, and, like the
verb, it denotes an activity. But otherwise, it behaves like a copula because it
does not have an object. In the copular-verb sentence, the subject does not act
upon the object, for it has no object; it has a complement. (A subject
acts upon the object only when the sentence is a verb sentence.) A verb is not
copular in its own right. Rather, it is copular when it has a complement that determines something about the activity
it denotes:

1. The complement locates the place of the subject’s
act.

In the sentence:

He restedin bed,

there is no object: Rather, the
subject’s act `rested’ is located by the noun-phrase
complement `in bed’. Simply, `in bed’ names the place where the
subject `he’ performed the act denoted by the copular verb `rested’.
Some other place-namer functions of the complement are illuminated on
this grid:

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

He

rested

in bed.

The
man

slipped

on
the wet path.

He

lives

in
London.

2. The complement identifies the existential
character of the subject’s act.

Whether the existential character of the subject’s act is named
prosaically:

The
girl leftin a hurry,

or metaphorically:

The
girl leftin high dudgeon,

it is a
fact that the complement specifies the character of the subject’s act
by naming its identity. The identity of `left' in the foregoing
sentences is the `in a hurray’ or `in high dudgeon' version of
the act denoted by `left’. Other identity-namers of the act denoted by
`left' might be `in a leisurely manner’, `without regret’, etc.
These
identity-namers of the subject’s act are nouns for the simple reason
that they name. (A further discussion of why they are not properly
classified as adverbs occurs in the Chapter `The Parts of Speech’,
under the heading `Noun Case’.)

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

The
girl

left

in
a hurry (noun phrase)..

The
girl

left

in high dudgeon (noun phrase)..

The romance

ended

in tears (noun).

3. The complement identifies the direction of the subject’s
act.

When the copular verb itself identifies its own character, as in
this sentence:

The
pair ravedabout the trip,

its orientation (or
`direction’ or `bent’) is further identified by a noun-phrase
complement. The same reasoning informs the analysis of the sentence `He talked
of morality’. The subject’s act, denoted by the copular verb
`talked’, is said to have an `of morality’ bent, just as the
subject’s act, denoted by the copular verb `raved’, is said to have
an `about the trip’ bent. In exactly the same way, the complement
identifies the bent of the subject’s act with an -ing ending noun:

I wentfishing. / We godancing.

Without the direction-naming
service of the nouns `fishing’ and `dancing’, the copular verbs
`went’ and `go’ would not be capable of denoting an activity.

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

The
pair

raved

about
the trip (noun phrase).

He

talked

of
morality (noun phrase).

I

went

fishing
(noun: gerund).

4. The complement names the context of the subject’s
act.

In this sentence:

The
comment was utteredin jest/on the spur of the
moment,

there is no activity at all.
There is instead a locating of the subject `the comment’ in an
`uttered-in-jest’ and an uttered-on-the-spur-of-the-moment
context. It is clear in these sentences that the point made about the
subject `the comment’ is not that it perpetrated an act. The point is
that the act was perpetrated in a particular context. That context is
named by the noun phrases `in gest’ and `on the spur of the moment’:

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

The
comment

was
uttered

in
jest. (noun phrase).

The
comment

was
uttered

on the spur of the moment. (noun phrase).

5. The complement names the content of the subject’s
act.

In
the sentence:

The
bushman predicted that there will be a storm

the noun-phrase `that there will
be a storm’ names the content of the act `predicted’ of the subject
`the bushman’. It was an act of storm-prediction. The other sentences
on the grid also have compound-noun templates like
`storm-prediction: `war-prophecy’, `revenge-threat’,
`nonsense-talk’.

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

The
bushman

predicted

that there will be a storm (noun phrase)..

The
speech

prophesied

war
(noun).

She

threatened

revenge (noun).

The
politician

talked

nonsense (noun).

6. The complement names the purpose of the subject’s
act.

Sentences like:

I live
to please you

and

They
shouted to warn him

are all too easy to mistake for
verb sentences in which `live to please’ is the verb phrase, `I’ the
subject and `you’ the object. That the subject does not act upon the
object is made clear in their passive-voice cast:

To
please you is why I live

To
warn him is why they shouted.

Nothing attests more clearly
than this cast that `to please you’ and `to warn him’ are noun
phrases. And the `why’ component of both sentences attests to the
purpose-naming role of the noun phrases. Purpose-naming roles are
performed also by `for’-headed noun phrases, as the grid shows:

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

I

live

to
please you (noun phrase).

They

shouted

to warn him (noun phrase).

That

was
done

for your good. (noun phrase).

He

ministers

for pity’s sake (noun phrase).

7. The subject and complement depict their genitive
relationship.

In:

The
soldiers had orders,

there is no activity. There is
only the depiction of a genitive relationship between the subject `the
soldiers’ and the noun complement `orders’. The relationship
depicted here has the meaning-template `soldiers’ orders’. In
the other sentence on the grid, the meaning template is `the child’s
doll’.

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

The
soldiers

had

orders. (noun)

The
child

owns

a doll. (noun)

8. The complement joins the copular verb to describe the
subject.

In both these sentences:

The
chicken was fried crisp

He waxed
lyrical/indignant

there are the
predicate-adjective complements `crisp’, `lyrical’ and
`indignant’. Being predicate adjectives, they necessarily describe the
noun subject `the chicken’ and pronoun subject `he’. In neither
sentence is the subject described by the predicate adjective alone. That
is, the subject `the chicken’ is not described merely as `crisp’; it
is described as `crisp fried’. And the subject `he’ is not described
only as `lyrical’; it is described as `waxed lyrical’ and `waxed
indignant’. In this sense, the copular verb is part of the description
that a predicate-adjective complement makes of the subject.

subject

predicate

copular
verb

complement

The
chicken

was
fried

crisp.(predicate adjective)

He

waxed

lyrical/indignant.
(predicate adjectives)

What's
it all for?

Why do we need to know about the three basic-sentence procedures
`verb basic sentence', `copula basic sentence' and `copular-verb basic
sentence' and their habits? The good reason is that we cannot know how
the parts of sentences work to make sense if we do not know what those
parts are. Each of the basic-sentence procedures raises a subject, but
each has a characteristic way of saying something about it. The ability
to understand those ways is the first and the essential step in learning
to analyse sentences. And it is only by analysing sentences that we are
able to determine whether they are soundly constructed and therefore
competent to make unambiguous sense.

Like any analytical procedure, sentence analysis is not a matter
of hard-and-fast rules. Like the procedures of reasoning in every
discipline, reasoning about sentences leads to conclusions that differ
significantly. This is nothing short of excellent, for therein lies the
activity that keeps a discipline alive and active.Here is one example of two grammarians drawing different
conclusions about the procedures of the same sentence. The sentence is:

Its
main character made Morris's novel eminently suitable for
adaptation to film by this talented young script writer.

Grammarian
`1’: This
is a verb basic sentence in which the subject `Its main character’
acts upon the object `Morris's novel’ to put it into the state named
by the noun phrase `eminently suitable for adaptation to film by this
talented young script writer’.

Grammarian
`2’:This
is not a verb sentence in which the subject perpetrates an act upon the
object. That is obvious: its statement is not that `its main character made
Morris's novel’. Neither is it the verb-sentence type in which the
subject acts upon the object to put it into a particular state. This
again is obvious: logically, the subject `Its main character’ did not
perpetrate, and by nature could not have perpetrated, any act upon
`Morris's novel’, let alone an act that could put it into any
`state’. Rather, this is a sentence in which the subject `Its
main character’is
describedas one that `made
Morris's novel eminently suitable for adaptation to film by this
talented young script writer’. In other words, the subject is
described by predication. In true copular-verb manner, made
is part of the sequence that effects the description. So this is a
copular-verb basic sentence.

There is, in fact, nothing sinister in this divergence of
opinions: Both points of view are tenable because both engage in a
quest to describe how a sentence makes sense. Indeed, disagreement is
what makes syntactic analysis fun. It should be indulged freely. (And
it is: brawls among grammarians are common.) The rules of engagement are
simple:

Construct
your point of view and argue it vehemently, but note other points of
view: you may want to modify yours in the light of them.

Do
not throw punches.

EXERCISE
1 is appropriate here.

Styles of the independent sentence

There are only four styles of sentences that make statements.
These styles are infinitely accommodating and flexible. They do not
limit our self-expression any more than does the fact that all our
reasoning procedures are either inductive or deductive. (People who
think they can reason `laterally' are kidding themselves!) It is a
writer's way of thinking about what he wants to say that determines the
style in which each of his basic sentences will extend their scope for
saying something.

The following is a sample of the four sentence styles. The basic
sentence in each is underlined, and the verb, copula or
copular in each is rendered in bold italics:

Simple-sentence
style

The simple sentence is any basic sentence. It is `simple’
because no complex or compound operations happens in it. A few
inter-planted adverbs and adjectives do not make a complex sentence of
it.

The
book is a justifiably angry polemic.

This is a copula basic sentence
in which the subject `book’ is assigned the definition `a polemic’
by the copula `is’. The adjective phrase `justifiably angry’
describes the noun `polemic’.

Complex-sentence
style

The complex sentence is formed when a basic sentence is embedded
by phrases with a variety of syntactic functions.

Reopening
their battle on the eve of the election, they warned
that all candidates will be challenged to oppose the proposed defence
cuts.

This complex sentence has a
copular-verb basic sentence that specifies the content of the act
`warned’ of the subject `they’ with the noun phrase `that all
candidates will be challenged to oppose the cuts’.

Compound-sentence style

The
compound sentence conjoins two or more simple sentences by means of
logical operators.

It
is an annoyance that their writers play historian
because there is no more in these stories than ordinaryromance.

This compound sentence contains:

(i)
a copula basic sentence in which copula `is’ directs the noun phrase
`an annoyance that their writers play historian’ to occupy the vacant
subject `It’.

This
is compounded by the logical operator because to:

(ii)
the copula basic sentence in which the copula `is’ directs the noun
phrase `no more than romance’ to occupy the vacant subject `there’.

Composite-sentence style

A composite sentence is made up of several sentences that are
capable of being spliced by commas.

We
insist on fresh vegetables, they
like strong spicing, their children will eat
only chips, so choosing a restaurant is always a
problem.

This sentence contains:

(i)
a copular-verb basic sentence in which the noun phrase `on vegetables’
locates the direction of the act `insist’ of the subject `We’.

This
is spliced to:

(ii)
a verb basic sentence in which the subject `They’ perpetrates the act
denoted by `like’ upon the object `spicing’.

This
is spliced to:

(iii)
a verb basic sentence in which the subject `children’ perpetrates the
act denoted by `will eat’ upon the object `chips’.

This
is spliced by a comma and `so' to:

(iv)
a copula basic sentence in which the copula `is’ assigns the
definition `a problem’ to the noun-phrase subject `choosing a
restaurant’.

EXERCISE
2 is appropriate here.

The
dependent sentence

The dependent sentence does not construct
its own subject-object/complement unit. It borrows that unit, and the
sense it makes, from the independent sentence that precedes it. The
dependent sentence is a staple
feature of texts that represent dialogue:

`Margaret
was married yesterday.'

`I
know.'

`You
will miss her.'

`Yes.'

Both the sentences `I know’ and `Yes’ depend on the sentences
that precedes them: It is only because the sentence `Margaret was
married yesterday’ precedes it that `I know’ can make the sense `I
know that Margaret was married yesterday'. And it is only because the
sentence `You will miss her’ precedes it that `Yes’ can make the
sense `I will miss her'.

The next sentence is not a model of the basic sentence: `The
tall girl’. Yet it raises the subject `girl' and describes her as
`tall': Doing this, it should be acknowledged as a copula basic
sentence. But it is not: The description is not effected by the copula:
The adjective `tall' is an attributive adjective, not a predicate
adjective. Given its text, this sentence reveals itself to be the verb
basic sentence `The tall girl is flying to the moon tomorrow':

`Who
is flying to the moon tomorrow?'

`The
tall girl.'

The dependent sentence is in no way an inferior sentence. In some
texts it is much more appropriate than the independent sentence. Indeed,
the writer or speaker who uses independent sentences in contexts that
prefer dependent ones is irritating enough to provoke protest along
these lines:

Don't
keep finishing your sentences. I am not a bloody fool.Frederick
Lonsdale, Child of the Twenties